So many questions linger as to the mechanics, specifics and functioning of the recently enacted "fund " . I really don't think anyone knows how this will ultimately affect infant medical care as well as settlement and verdict size down the road. (see Public Health Law Section 2999-h[1]).
The first question I have to pose is " what would be worse for plaintiffs, the newly enacted fund or (God forbid) the defeated cap on pain and suffering at $250,000? Both are brutal? Interested in your thoughts on that.
While I clearly understand the thinking behind the statute(i.e. a no-fault type fund, readily available treatment and lowering of insurance claims/verdicts) I think the statute is flawed. First of all, all "brain-damaged infants" already receive care and treatment via medicaid or private coverage. Treatment, surgeries, therapy, special ed, meds, home care attendants and long-term care facilities are already paid for. So these poor kids are now getting ice in Alaska in the winter from the "fund". Secondly, parents and families will spend the next 30 years of their lives "begging for treatment, approvals etc...Will they have to use only medical providers on the "fund's approved list ? Don't like it , don't get it !
Lastly, the statute promises to have a "chilling effect " on settlements and verdicts . As a result the affected families and their children will be "short-changed" and will not get that lifetime nest-egg which they so badly need and deserve. The "financial independence " that a large verdict or settlement provides(not to mention peace of mind) will be a thing of the past. In essence , the litigation may never end for these victims.
Of course a lot will depend on the promulgation of the accompanying regulations and subsequent judicial interpretation of same.
Let me say it again...Right now I don't like it! Your thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment